Electronic Development Services Committee Meeting Minutes

Meeting Number 13

Monday, June 07, 2021 at 9:30 A.m. - 1:00 P.m.

Live streamed

Roll Call

• Mayor Frank Scarpitti
• Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton
• Regional Councillor Jack Heath
• Regional Councillor Joe Li
• Regional Councillor Jim Jones
• Councillor Keith Irish
• Councillor Alan Ho
• Councillor Reid McAlpine
• Councillor Karen Rea
• Councillor Andrew Keyes
• Councillor Amanda Collucci
• Councillor Khalid Usman
• Councillor Isa Lee

Staff

• Andy Taylor, Chief Administrative Officer
• Claudia Storto, City Solicitor and Director of Human Resources
• Biju Karumanchery, Director, Planning & Urban Design
• Bryan Frois, Chief of Staff
• Ron Blake, Senior Development Manager, Planning & Urban Design
• Alain Cachola, Senior Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Projects
• Geoff Day, Senior Planner, Zoning & Special Projects
• Loy Cheah, Acting Director, Engineering
• Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage
• Darryl Lyons, Manager, Policy
• Brad Roberts, Manager, Zoning and Special Projects
• Laura Gold, Council/Committee Coordinator
• Mary-Jane Courchesne
• Morgan Jones, Commissioner of Community Services
• Adam Grant, Fire Chief
• Martha Pettit, Deputy Clerk
• Prathapan Kumar, Senior Manager of Infrastructure
• Nhat-Anh Nguyen, Senior Manager, Development & Environmental Engineer
• Victoria Chai, Assistant City Solicitor
• Kimberley Kitteringham, Director, Legislative Services & Communications
• Peter Wokral, Senior Heritage Planner

​Alternate formats for this document are available upon request

---

1.

CALL TO ORDER

In consideration of the ongoing public health orders, this meeting was conducted electronically to maintain physical distancing of participants. With the passage of the COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act, 2020 (Bill 197), municipal Council Members are now permitted to meet remotely and count towards quorum.

The Development Services Committee meeting convened at 9:32 AM with Regional Councillor Jim Jones in the Chair for all items on the agenda.

Councillor Keith Irish assumed the Chair at (1:00 PM). Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton assumed the Chair at (1:18 PM). Regional Councillor Jim Jones reassumed the Chair at (1:23 PM)

Mayor Frank Scarpitti arrived at 9:37 AM.

Councillor Amanda Collucci arrived at 9:45 AM.

Committee recessed from 11:00 – 11:15 AM, and from 12:15 – 12:34 PM.

 

2.

DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest.

3.

APPROVAL OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

3.1

DEVELOPMENT SERVICESCOMMITTEE MINUTES – MAY 25, 2021 (10.0)

• Moved by Regional Councillor Jack Heath
  Seconded by Councillor Alan Ho
  1. That the minutes of the Development Services Committee meeting held May 25, 2021, be confirmed.
  Carried

4.

DEPUTATIONS

There were deputations for the following items:

8.2 Information Report – Phase 3b: New Comprehensive Zoning By-Law Project, PR 13 128340 (10.5)

9.3 The Alignment of The Yonge North Subway Extension (5.14)

5.

COMMUNICATIONS

Note: Please refer to Item #9.1 for motion.

• Moved by Councillor Alan Ho
  Seconded by Councillor Andrew Keyes

  That the following communications providing comments regarding Motion – City of Markham Tanking Storm Ponds and Creating Parkland on Top be received for information purposes:

  1. Valerie Burke
     
     
  2. Evelin Ellison

   

  Carried

5.1

RECOMMENDATION REPORT GARDEN HOMES (MARKHAM) INC. 73 MAIN ST. S. PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION 19TM-17005 TO PERMIT 13 TOWNHOUSE DWELLINGS AND A DETACHED DWELLING (WARD 4) FILE SU 17 157341 (10.7)

Note: Please refer to Item #8.1 for staff report.

• Moved by Councillor Alan Ho
  Seconded by Councillor Andrew Keyes
  1. That the communication submitted by Mark Yarranton, Partner, KLM Planning Partners Inc. providing comments on the above subject matter be received.
  Carried

5.2

INFORMATION REPORT – PHASE 3B: NEW COMPREHENSIVE ZONING BY-LAW PROJECT, PR 13 128340 (10.5)

Note: Please refer to Item #8.2 for staff report.

• Moved by Councillor Alan Ho
  Seconded by Councillor Andrew Keyes

  That the communication submitted by J.D. McDermott, Principal Planner, McDermott & Associates Limited providing comments on the above subject matter be received.

  Carried

5.3

THE ALIGNMENT OF THE YONGE NORTH SUBWAY EXTENSION (5.14)

Note: Please refer to Item #9.3 for motion.

• Moved by Councillor Alan Ho
  Seconded by Councillor Andrew Keyes

  That the following communications providing comments regarding Motion - The Alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension be received for information purposes:

  1. Daniela Provenzano
  2. Neomal Jayasekera
  3. John Craig
  4. Carolyn MacDonald
  5. Gael Robertson-Craig
  6. Kan Zhang
  7. Farzad Tooryani
  8. Bill and Debbie Antonacci
  9. Joe Amodeo
  10. Louise and Gordon Patterson
  11. Norine Thomason
  12. Eileen Neuts
  13. Don Russell
  14. Carol Takagi
  15. Iemima Elefteratos and Petru Florin Caracuda
  16. Jack Le
  17. Alice Young and Jason Tung
  18. Marilyn and Ed Helcoe
  19. Miriam, Steve, and Dave Segal
  20. Christine Smith
  21. Wendy Girvan
  22. Royal Orchard Ratepayer Association
  23. Rick Takagi
  24. Amanda Wilkins
  25. Ana Periquet
  26. Ernique and Maria Periquet
  27. Christine Schmoll
  28. Terry Hrynyshyn
  29. Douglas and Mary Ann Needham
  30. Gerald Goldberg
  31. Izabela Cunningham
  32. Joan and Gary Klaassen
  33. Cam Ecker
  34. Courtney and Vlad Roytberg
  35. Don Russel
  36. Peter Palframan
  37. Sue Shillow
  Carried

5.4

CITY OF MARKHAM TANKING STORM PONDS AND CREATING PARKLAND ON TOP (5.0, 6.3)

6.

PETITIONS

7.

CONSENT REPORTS - DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY ISSUES

7.1

GLYNNWOOD TRIBUTARY – MUNICIPAL CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) STUDY UPDATE (WARD 1)

Loy Cheah, Acting Director of Engineering, advised that the revised preferred alternative for the new storm sewer and channel (from the Thornhill Community Centre to Glynwood Pond) will address the flooding at the Thornhill Community Centre and Library, and in the surrounding area.

Alain Cachola, Senior Manager of Infrastructure and Capital Works, provided a brief overview of the project details.

• Moved by Regional Councillor Jack Heath
  Seconded by Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton
  1. That the staff report entitled “Glynnwood Tributary – Municipal Class Environmental Assessment (EA) Study Update, (Ward 1), be received;
  2. That the revised preferred alternative for new storm sewer and channel from the Thornhill Community Centre to the Glynnwood pond, to alleviate flooding in the area as set out in the Environmental Study Report be endorsed;
  3. That staff be authorized to issue a Notice of Study Completion for the project and make the Environmental Study Report available for public review for a period of 60 days commencing July 2021;
  4. And that staff be directed to report back to Council on property acquisition, funding and negotiations with HCN-Revera (Glynnwood retirement Living Inc). and Liberty Development Corporation (Shouldice Hernia Centre) for the acquisition of certain lands / easement and construction required for the new storm sewer and channel;
  5. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

7.2

DESIGNATED PROPERTY GRANT APPLICATIONS -2021 (16.11)

• Moved by Councillor Reid McAlpine
  Seconded by Regional Councillor Joe Li
  1. That the report entitled “Designated Heritage Property Grant Applications -2021”, dated June 7 2021, be received; and,
  2. That Designated Heritage Property Grants for 2021 be approved in the amounts noted for the following properties, totaling $29,999.99, provided that the applicants comply with eligibility requirements of the program; and,
     1. 32 Washington Street, Markham Village-up to $3,332.67, for replacement of existing aluminium storm windows with traditional wooden storm windows and reconditioning of the existing historic wooden window;
     2. 36 Church Street, Markham Village- up to $3,686.58 for the reconditioning and restoration of the historic wooden board and batten siding;
     3. 33 Dickon Hill Road, Dickson Hill-up to $5,000.00 for the reconditioning/restoration of the existing historic wooden 6 over 6 windows;
     4. 99 Thoroughbred Way, Markham-up to $3,686.58 for the restoration and selective replacement of damaged wooden clapboard siding;
     5. 11172 Warden Avenue, Markham-up to $3,686.58 for repointing and repairs to the stone foundation and historic brick walls and buttresses;
     6. 188 Main Street, Unionville-up to $1,921.00 for the production of traditional wooden storm windows to fit the arched window openings;
     7. 123 Main Street, Unionville-up to $5,000.00 for the repair and replacement of the front veranda floor deck, veranda post trims and the re-puttying and painting of historic storm windows;
     8. 26 Colborne St., Thornhill-up to $3,686.58 for the removal of later wooden cove siding and restoration of the underlying historic wooden clapboard siding; and,
  3. That the grant request to fund repairs to the south facing reproduction veranda of 1 Millbrook Gate which is not visible from the public realm be denied; and,
  4. That the grants be funded through the Designated Heritage Property Grant Project Fund , Account 620-101-5699-21010 ($30,000.00 available for 2021); and further,
  5. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

7.3

COMMERCIAL FAÇADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM FOR 2021

• Moved by Councillor Reid McAlpine
  Seconded by Regional Councillor Joe Li
  1. That the report entitled “Commercial Façade Improvement Grant Program for 2021”, dated June 7, 2021 be received; and,
  2. That the $10,000.00 2021 Budget for the City of Markham Commercial Façade Improvement Program be topped up to $30,607.50 by utilizing unused funds of $13,107.50 from the 2019 and 2020 Commercial Façade Improvement Grant Programs (Accounts 620-101-5699-19015 and 620-101-5699-20018 respectively) and $7,500.00 from the 2019 Designated Heritage Property Grant Program (Account 620-101-5699-19015); and,
  3. That the recommended grants be awarded proportionally based on the $30,607.50 worth of funding available for 2021; and,
  4. That Council supports a grant for the proposed new awning at 139 Main St. Unionville subject to the applicant obtaining a Building/Heritage permit for the proposed work (up to a maximum of $2,885.63); and,
  5. That Council supports a grant for the replacement of the existing rotten wooden board and batten siding of the roof dormers at 157 Main St. Unionville with an appropriate aluminium siding selective repair subject to the applicant obtaining a Building/Heritage permit for the proposed work (up to a maximum of $4,620.31); and,
  6. That Council supports a grant for the selective repair and repainting of the wooden board and batten siding at 205 Main St. Unionville subject to the applicant obtaining a Heritage Permit for the proposed work (up to a maximum of $4,620.31); and,
  7. That Council supports a grant for the completed installation of a new cedar shingle roof at 206 Main St. Unionville (up to a maximum of $13,860.94); and,
  8. That Council supports a grant for the repair and repainting of the exterior 209 Main Street Unionville subject to the property being brought into compliance with the City’s Sign By-law and the applicant obtaining a Heritage Permit for the proposed work (up to a maximum of $4,620.31); and further,
  9. That staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.

      

  Carried

7.4

HERITAGE EASEMENT AGREEMENT TEMPORARY RELOCATION OF HERITAGE DWELLING (ARTHUR WEGG HOUSE), 10537 KENNEDY ROAD, WARD 6 (16.11.3)

• Moved by Councillor Khalid Usman
  Seconded by Regional Councillor Joe Li
  1. That the staff report titled “Heritage Easement Agreement , Temporary Relocation of Heritage Dwelling (Arthur Wegg House), 10537 Kennedy Road, Ward 6”, dated June 7, 2021, be received; and,
  2. That a by-law be passed to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute a Heritage Easement Agreement with the property owners of the Arthur Wegg House, and any other documents required to give effect thereto, in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor in support of the temporary relocation of the building; and,
  3. That Council has no objection to the temporary relocation of the Arthur Wegg House to facilitate grading work in support of the future development of the property; and further,
  4. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

8.

REGULAR REPORTS - DEVELOPMENT AND POLICY ISSUES

8.1

RECOMMENDATION REPORT GARDEN HOMES (MARKHAM) INC. 73 MAIN ST. S. PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION 19TM-17005 TO PERMIT 13 TOWNHOUSE DWELLINGS AND A DETACHED DWELLING (WARD 4) FILE SU 17 157341 (10.7)

Ron Blake, Senior Manager of Development Planning, addressed the Committee and summarized the details outlined in the recommendation report. The report recommends the approval of the Draft Plan of Subdivision 19TM-17005 submitted by Garden Homes (Markham) Inc. to permit 13 townhomes and a single detached dwelling at 73 Main Street South. The draft plan also includes a block to be conveyed to the City to widen the Mill Street right of way at the intersection of Main Street South.

Committee briefly discussed existing concerns with the intersection at Mill Street and Main Street South.

Claudia Storto, City Solicitor, advised against requesting any changes to the road network at this stage in the planning process, as a settlement had recently been submitted to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) in respect of the Official Plan and Zoning By-Law Amendments, and the Site Plan Control Application for the development proposal.

Loy Cheah, Acting Director of Engineering, advised that based on the transportation study submitted by the applicant, changes to the intersection at Mill Street and Main Street South are not warranted at this time.  Mr. Cheah suggested that Engineering Staff monitor the intersection and report-back to the Development Services Committee at a future meeting on longer-term issues that could be addressed overtime.

Committee agreed that the 13 townhomes and detached dwelling proposed to be built at 73 Main Street South would not worsen the existing issues with the intersection, and supported staff’s suggestion to monitor the intersection for longer-term issues that could be addressed overtime.

• Moved by Councillor Karen Rea
  Seconded by Regional Councillor Jack Heath
  1. That the report dated June 7, 2021, titled “RECOMMENDATION REPORT, Garden Homes (Markham) Inc., 73 Main St. S., Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision 19TM-17005 to permit 13 townhouse dwellings and a detached dwelling, (Ward 4), File SU 17 157341”, be received; and,
  2. That Council direct the Director of Planning and Urban Design, or his designate, to issue draft plan of subdivision approval for 19TM-17005, subject to the conditions set out in Appendix ‘B’ to this report, as may be amended by the Director of Planning and Urban Design, and further subject to confirmation that the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal has approved the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments and approved in principle the Site Plan Control application; and,
  3. That the draft plan of subdivision approval for Plan of Subdivision 19TM-17005 will lapse after a period of three (3) years from the date of Council approval in the event that a subdivision agreement is not executed within that period; and,
  4. That Council assign servicing allocation for up to 14 dwellings; and further,
  5. That Engineering Staff be requested to monitor the intersection at Mill Street and Main Street Markham South and report back to the Development Services Committee on the matter at a future meeting.
  6. That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

8.2

INFORMATION REPORT – PHASE 3B: NEW COMPREHENSIVE ZONING BY-LAW PROJECT, PR 13 128340 (10.5)

Ron Blake, Senior Manager of Development Planning, addressed the Committee and summarized the details outlined in the staff report, and presentation. The report and presentation provide a status update and overview of the City’s draft new Comprehensive Zoning By-Law.

Nick McDonald, President, Meridian Planning Consultants provided a presentation on the draft new Comprehensive Zoning By-Law.

The following deputations were made on the Comprehensive Zoning By-Law:

Christine Bergauer-Free spoke in regards to ensuring that the draft Comprehensive Zoning By-Law honours the City’s 2014 Official Plan, protects existing communities, minimizes tree loss, and addresses the environmental footprint of infill housing.

Ian Free provided a detailed analysis of his recommendations in regards to the draft Comprehensive Zoning By-Law. Mr. Free made suggestions regarding definitions, impervious surfaces, defining alternative roof types, permitted encroachment into a required yard, encroachment of porches into required yards, parking of commercial motor vehicles, maximum outside wall heights, and front yard setbacks.  Mr. Free also advised that it needs to be more clear, which sections of by-laws are remaining, and which are being repealed. 

The Clerk will circulate a copy of Mr. Free’s analysis of the draft new Comprehensive Zoning By-Law to the Members of Council after the meeting.

Elizabeth Brown expressed concern that the draft new Comprehensive By-law does not adequately protect the massing, and scale of housing, suggesting the draft by-law would permit a 33% larger home than the existing by-law. Ms. Brown was also concerned that the draft new by-law was not compatible with existing communities, as it pushes the massing towards the street. Ms. Brown noted that requiring a one storey roofline on infill housing, and reducing the size of infill houses permitted would allow for infill homes to better blend into existing communities.

Committee provided the following feedback relative to the staff report and presentation on the draft new Comprehensive  Zoning By-Law:

• Requested that an overview of the issues and changes that will be required to combine the City’s Zoning By-laws be provided at the Development Services Workshop meeting being held on the draft new by-Law;
• Suggested that neighbourhoods should not be split between zones;
• Inquired if there is a timeline for the project;
• Requested that visual examples of what is permitted now versus what will be permitted under the draft new by-law be provided at the Development Services Workshop;
• Suggested that investment in older communities helps rejuvenate areas, and that the draft new by-law should provide enough flexibility to allow for a variety of housing designs for infill developments;
• Suggested that design guidelines be created for infill housing;
• Suggested that the Development Services Workshop on the new draft by-law be booked as soon as possible.

Mr. McDonald advised that choices had to be made in order to make the zoning consistent across the City, for example, one method for measuring height needed be selected from various methods currently being used.  Mr. McDonald also advised that both current building trends, and the intent of the City’s Official Plan were considered when making these choices, and that the intent was to keep the zoning the same throughout a neighbourhood.

The Mayor thanked staff and the consultant for their work, and residents for their feedback on the draft new Comprehensive Zoning By-Law.

• Moved by Councillor Alan Ho
  Seconded by Councillor Andrew Keyes
  1. That the deputations by Christiane Bergauer-Free, Ian Free, and Elizabeth Brown be received; and,
  2. That the report titled, “INFORMATION REPORT – PHASE 3B: New Comprehensive Zoning By-law Project, PR 13 128340” dated June 7, 2021, be received; and,
  3. That the Development Services Committee authorize the scheduling of three non-statutory Open Houses and a Development Services Workshop, as outlined in this report; and further,
  4. That staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution.
  Carried

8.3

ITEMS TO BE SENT TO COUNCIL ON JUNE 8, 2021

• Moved by Councillor Isa Lee
  Seconded by Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton

  That the Development Services Committee provide its consent for the following items to go to Council on June 8, 2021:

  1) 7.2 – Designated Property Grant

  2) 7.3 – Commercial Façade Improvement Grant Program for 2021

  3) 7.4 – Heritage Easement Agreement

  4) 7.5  – Garden Homes (Markham) Inc., 73 Main Street South, Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision.

  Carried

9.

MOTIONS

9.1

CITY OF MARKHAM TANKING STORM PONDS AND CREATING PARKLAND ON TOP (5.0, 6.3)

Councillor Keith Irish assumed the Chair at 1:00 PM

Regional Councillor Jim Jones advised that it has been requested that the motion on the City of Markham Tanking Storm Ponds and Creating Parkland on Top be referred to staff for further analysis.

Committee provided the following feedback on the motion regarding the City of Markham tanking storm ponds and creating parkland on top:

• Suggested that Engineering Staff evaluate the mechanics, capital cost, and maintenance cost of tanking storm water ponds, and that Planning Staff evaluate the effectiveness of tanking storm water ponds to provide parkland ;
• Noted that the tanking storm ponds should be considered on a case by case basis, as sinking the tanks may be more appropriate in certain instances, such as in higher density communities;
• Requested that staff look at what additional policies may be required if storm water ponds were permitted to be tanked on private property;
• Requested that staff breakout the issues so that they can be considered separately.

 

Biju Karumanchery, Director of Planning & Urban Design, advised that Planning Staff will collaborate with Environmental Services Staff to conduct a cost benefit analysis on the tanking of storm water ponds. Mr. Karumanchery advised that staff will also breakout the issues in their analysis in order for Committee to consider each issue separately. 

 

• Moved by Councillor Andrew Keyes
  Seconded by Councillor Reid McAlpine

  That the motion on the “City of Markham Tanking Storm Ponds and Creating Parkland on Top” be referred to staff for further analysis; and,

  That staff report back to the Development Services Committee at a future meeting.

  Carried
• Recommendation:

  Whereas the City of Markham is considered a leader in Community Planning and Development; and,

  Whereas the City of Markham recognizes that new Community Development should be premised on the efficient use of land for the benefit of the City and its residents; and,

  Whereas the Robinson Glen Block and other areas in the future urban area represents an opportunity for the City to implement industry leading techniques and technologies to create more livable communities; and,

  Whereas for example, the current stormwater pond located south of Sheridan Nurseries with a fence around it, should be tanked and parkland created on top as it is in a high density urban area and be financed by Kingdom Development because of their parkland deficiencies and they should be given a parkland credit; and,

  Whereas the Langstaff Gateway has been approved for stormwater storage tanks 11 years ago and parkland will be created on top of the tank and Condor should be given a parkland credit; and,

  Whereas the City of Markham’s $40 million stormwater pond being created on the west side of Torbay Road should be tanked and parkland created on top (in this case a bubbled sports dome that creates the equivalent of two regulation soccer fields) and be classified as parkland and paid for by applicants who have parkland deficiencies in their development applications submitted; and,

  Whereas the City of Markham needs to hire a civil engineering firm like SCS Consulting Group, Shaffer Consulting or Urbantech Engineering and engage B+H Architects to work on the Torbay Sports Fields Centre Concept; and,

  Whereas when storm ponds are identified in complete destination Transit Oriented Community stations, they should be tanked and parkland created on top because it makes a more desirable urban public realm; and,

  Whereas any storm ponds installed or being installed and requires fencing, indicates they are unsafe for the public, therefore tanking the storm ponds should be considered and parkland created on top; and,

  Whereas storm ponds created in TOC communities, tanking the storm pond should be considered as they serve a dual purpose, 1st, as a stormwater storage tank, and 2nd, parkland on top of very expensive lands; and,

  Whereas parkland cash-in-lieu is taken because the application doesn’t have sufficient parkland contribution; and,

  Whereas, parkland cash-in-lieu is worth approx $3,750,000 in Markham, but it is subject to a market value appraisal, Lands in Markland Centre, Langstaff Gateway / Richmond Hill Centre and Vaughan Metropolitian Centre are valued between $13,000,000 to $25,000,000 per acre; and,

  Whereas one such technique is to discontinue where possible, the practice of constructing traditional style land-consumptive open stormwater ponds; and,

  Whereas it is recognized that open stormwater detention ponds are an undesirable inefficient use of land, collect unsightly garbage, are unsafe and dangerous to local residents and present a local breeding ground for disease carrying mosquitos; and,

  Whereas the use of underground stormwater storage tanks will eliminate the undesirable impact of traditional stormwater detention ponds; and,

  Whereas underground stormwater storage facilities create an opportunity for the City to develop more parkland for active and passive recreation for the benefit of the residents of the municipality; and,

  Whereas the annual maintenance cost of underground stormwater detention facilities is significantly less, relative to the traditional stormwater detention ponds; and,

  Whereas underground stormwater storage facilities meet or exceed stormwater management standards with a design life of 100 to 150 years and will only require minor maintenance during that period to extend beyond that period of time. Further, the total life cycle for the water storage tanks are up to 200 to 300 years, rendering the City’s Alternative Infrastructure Policy unnecessary; and,

  Whereas the City will peer review the detailed structural design of the underground tanks at the expense of the proponent; and,

  Now Therefore Be It Resolved,

  1. That the City of Markham endorse and approve the use of underground stormwater storage facilities in all residential, industrial and commercial developments as they are a benefit to the Community by providing opportunities for usable parkland, etc; and,
  2. That the City of Markham not impose the Alternative Infrastructure Policy for the use of underground stormwater storage facilities; and,
  3. That the City of Markham endorse and approve the use of underground stormwater storage facilities for the Torbay Properties in the Markham’s Steeles-area to provide the required stormwater protection and resolve an existing on going flooding problem; and,
  4. That the Chief Administrative Officer for the City be authorized to negotiate a fair parkland credit for the parkland created by the use of the underground stormwater storage facilities and come back with a stormwater storage tank and parkland on the top policy,
  5. That the Commissioner of Development Services develop a stormwater management retrofit plan strategy and identify the storm ponds that could be converted to a water storage tank with parkland on top.

  Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be sent to:
  • Hon. Jeff Yurek, Minister of the Environment, Conservation and Parks;
  • Hon. Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing;
  • Hon. Laurie Scott, Minister of Infrastructure Ontario
  • Hon. Victor Fedeli, Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade;
  • Hon. Lisa MacLeod, Minister of Heritage, Sport, Tourism and Culture Industries;
  • MPP Billy Pang, Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport (Tourism);
  • MPP Vincent Ke, Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Tourism, Culture and Sport (Culture and Sport)
  • Debbie Low, President & CEO – Canadian Sport Institute Ontario
  • John MacKenize, CEO, Toronto, and Region Conservation Authority.
  • Chris Raynor, Regional Clerk, Regional Municipality of York;

  Referred

9.2

RICHMOND HILL GO TRANSIT LINE - OPPORTUNITY FOR A TOC GO STATION AT GREEN LANE/JOHN STREET AREA (5.14)

Deputy Mayor Don Hamilton assumed the Chair at 1:18 PM.

Committee supported staff investigating the opportunity of having a GO Station at Green Lane and John Street on the Richmond Hill GO Transit Line.

• Moved by Regional Councillor Jim Jones
  Seconded by Councillor Keith Irish

  Whereas the Green Lane/John Street/Bayview Avenue area of Thornhill is and has been in transition for several years and contains a wide range of low-density employment lands; and,

  Whereas there is the possibility that with a comprehensive and sophisticated level of urban planning, all stakeholders could see their land use priorities realized to their satisfaction; and,

  Whereas significant traffic volumes are a concern with new development applications like Tridel (167 units) on the eastern edge of the Ladies Golf Course, Liberty Development proposed (1,287 units) development on the Shouldice lands and Timbercreek proposed (579 units) redevelopment of the Thornhill Square Shopping Centre lands; and,

  Whereas significant amounts of land needed by GO Transit for traditional park and ride solutions are unavailable and/or not viable due to the high price of land at TOC GO Stations; and,

  Whereas medium and high-density condos and office development will be in and around the TOC GO Station, minimal or no parking will be available at the station and mobility solutions will be walking, cycling and autonomous (minibus) vehicles to get around the “Village of Green Lane” community and GO Station; and,

  Whereas YRT buses coming from the east will drop transit riders off at Green Lane / John Street GO Station and the potential Yonge Subway Stations at Royal Orchard Blvd. and/or Clark Avenue; and,

  Whereas merging different modes of transit into one service to suit the mobility needs of individual customers is now an established business model, known as mobility-as-a-service (MaaS); and,

  Whereas in the future, autonomous vehicles will have a role as an F/L/O mile option. People switch if they experience transit as fast, convenient, and affordable. People do not typically switch to sustainable modes of transport for their green credentials. They switch if the overall experience is fast and convenient. F/L/O mile options led to more sustainable mobility if they make the public transit experience as good as or better than that of using a car; and,

  Whereas community planners need to be thinking about autonomous vehicle (like the Olli minibus) solutions because of the significant impacts they will have on travel within the TOC and to and from the GO transit station; and,

  Whereas autonomous (minibus) vehicles would provide the F/L/O mile connectivity to transit users, increasing mobility options for people within a ¾ mile radius of the station and will greatly benefit the disabled, seniors, and children too; and,

  Whereas construction of the Yonge North Subway Extension (YNSE) is scheduled to start 2022-23 near the Langstaff GO Transit Station; and,

  Whereas Metrolinx in the latter part of 2021 or 2022, is planning to study the Richmond Hill GO Transit Line and prepare an initial Business Case; and,

  Whereas the Richmond Hill GO Transit line, may have the potential to add several new TOC GO Station stops including Bloomington, Gormley, Elgin Mills Road, Major Mackenzie Road, 16th Ave, High-Tech Road, Green Lane/John Street, Steeles Ave, Finch Ave, York Mills, Eglinton Ave, Bloor Street, Queen Street and Corktown (Distillery District) in the future; and,

  Whereas all RH TOC GO Stations should be planned as complete, integrated destination stations. Before the pandemic, ridership was 10,500 passengers a day. Every station should be planned as destination TOC Stations with a ridership target for the RH GO line by 2051 of 300,000 passengers a day; and,

  Whereas these lands are in a very strategic location with frontage on Green Lane/John Street, and abutting two rail lines, one of which is the Richmond Hill GO Transit Line going from Richmond Hill to Union Station, as well as being contiguous to, or a short distance from low and medium density residential uses; and,

  Whereas this 65+ acres of employment lands at Green Lane and John Street is a strategic parcel for residential intensification infill, as well as for a significant increase in non-industrial employment opportunities for the residents of Markham; and,

  Whereas there are few locations of this size in the GTA available for both residential intensification and non-industrial employment opportunities, leading to the conclusion that these lands should be thoroughly studied with the intent of having a comprehensive Green Lane / John Street TOC Secondary Plan; and,

  Whereas with proper urban planning, it is extremely important that prior to any new development occurring a comprehensive local road and pathway network and land use plan be established; and,

  Whereas the Village of Green Lane goal is to be planned as a net-zero green community, with district energy, automatic waste collection, energy from waste, solar and geo-thermal solutions be investigated; and,

  Whereas it is in the interest of the city, local businesses, and residents to have this plan cover all the relevant lands and have an interactive planning process involving landowners, ratepayers, Metrolinx, I/O, MTO, YRT and professional world class TOC urban design and planning consultants; and,

  Now Therefore Be It Resolved:

  1. That staff be directed to report back on an estimated cost for the studies, timing, and potential financial resources; and,
  2. That Staff engage consultants determined by Staff to be necessary, such as urban design architects, TOC urban planners, transportation engineers, landscape architects and retail consultant to complete a secondary plan study for the lands shown on the attached Appendix A; and,
  3. That Staff investigate the feasibility of being part of the City of Toronto Transit Commission and Metrolinx automated vehicle trial at the Rouge Hill GO Station as it represents a key role in the establishment of complete destination rail transit integrated community station at Green Lane / John Street and other TOC rail stations in Markham and York Region.
     • Hon. Caroline Mulroney, Minister, Ministry of Transportation;
     • Hon. Kinga Surma, Associate Minister of Transportation;
     • Hon. Laurie Scott, Minister of Infrastructure;
     • Hon. Jeff Yurek, Minister of the Environment, Conservation & Parks;
     • Hon. Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing;
     • Hon. Victor Fedeli, Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade;
     • Hon. Catherine Mckenna, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities;
     • Phil Verster, President and CEO, Metrolinx;
     • John MacKenize, CEO, Toronto, and Region Conservation Authority;
     • Chris Raynor, Regional Clerk, Regional Municipality of York;
     • All Members of Federal Parliament in the Regional Municipality of York;
     • All Members of Provincial Parliament in the Regional Municipality of York; and,
     • All Members of Regional Council in the Regional Municipality of York
  Carried

9.3

THE ALIGNMENT OF THE YONGE NORTH SUBWAY EXTENSION (5.14)

Note: Item 9.3 was discussed prior to items 9.1 and 9.2.

 

Councillor Keith Irish introduced the item and requested that deputations be heard first.

The following deputations were made on the Yonge North Subway Extension:

Gerald Goldberg spoke in regards to the Royal Orchard Community being threatened by the proposed Option 3 Yonge Subway alignment, and that not stopping the option would be a betrayal of trust. Mr. Goldberg suggested that future developments should not be prioritized over the wishes of the existing community, and that two subway stops within less than a km is unnecessary. Mr. Goldberg supported the extension of the Yonge Subway along Yonge Street.

Peter Palframan spoke in support of the proposed 2009 Yonge Subway alignment, which goes directly up Yonge Street, below ground and angles into the Richmond Hill terminal, and spoke in opposition of the Option 3 Yonge Subway alignment.

Dev Chopra suggested that rights and liberties of residents living in the Royal Orchard community should be considered when deciding the Yonge Subway alignment, and expressed concern that the preferred Option 3 Yonge Subway alignment will go under 61 homes in his community. Mr. Chopra suggested that another alignment for the Yonge Subway extension should be considered.

Tim King spoke in opposition to the Option 3 Yonge Subway alignment, suggesting that it is the most disruptive and provides the least benefits to the existing residents living in the community. Mr. King supported the Yonge Subway extension alignment along Yonge Street.

Mike Kavouris suggested there should be a public inquiry into the Metrolinx Option 3 Yonge Subway alignment, and advised that the Thornhill Green Community is being threatened by the proposal, displaying photos of a rally in opposition of the Option 3 Yonge Subway alignment. Mr. Kavouris supported the extension of the Yonge Subway with a different alignment.

Bruce Drysdale spoke in support of the Option 1 Yonge Subway alignment and in opposition of the Option 3 Yonge Subway alignment. Mr. Drysdale noted that future residents living in Langstaff will still have great access to the Yonge Subway if it is aligned along Yonge Street, and asked Members of Council not to support the Option 3 Yonge Subway Alignment.

Ed Huang spoke in opposition of the Option 3, and in support of the Option 1 Yonge Subway Alignment, as Option 3 will adversely impact the Royal Orchard Community. Mr. Huang would like the subway to come to Markham, but would like it done the right way.

Michelle Gower, and Lav Shelat registered to speak, but did not speak at the meeting.

Mayor Frank Scarpitti requested the motion be deferred for one month to provide Metrolinx and the Province with an opportunity to address the issues raised at the open houses regarding the alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension.

The Chair asked for procedural advice on whether Members of Council could speak to main motion if a motion to defer the item has been made.

Kimberley Kitteringham, City Clerk, advised that it is the City’s practice to exhaust the speakers list prior to deferring the item. Ms. Kitteringham also advised that motions to postpone or defer an item are debatable.

Committee provided the following feedback on the motion regarding the alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension:

• Suggested other viable Options for the Yonge Subway should be considered;
• Understood that the residents of Thornhill want the Yonge Subway, but with a different alignment;
• Noted the high cost and budgetary gap of extending the Yonge Subway along Yonge Street in this location;
• Advised that they supported the residents of Thornhill.

Committee debated whether the motion should be deferred.

Note: After the June 7, 2021 DSC meeting adjourned it was determined there was an error in the declaration of the vote results relative to the motion to defer Item No. 9.3  (the alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension).  The Chair declared the deferral motion was carried when it should have been declared as lost. No DSC Members objected to the declaration at the meeting. The error was discovered subsequent to the meeting upon a review of the Zoom footage.  To address this error, the main motion regarding the alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension was introduced at the June 8, 2021 Markham City Council meeting for a vote.  The main motion was adopted on a recorded vote  [See Council minutes of June 8, 2021, New Business, Item No. 11.2].

• Moved by Mayor Frank Scarpitti
  Seconded by Councillor Khalid Usman

  That the motion regarding the alignment of the Yonge North Subway Extension be deferred for one month to provide the Province and Metrolinx with time to respond to the issues identified at the open houses on Yonge North Subway Extension.

  Carried
• Recommendation:

  Whereas, the Yonge North Subway Extension is a priority project in the Province of Ontario’s Transit Plan and is York Region’s Top Transit priority, and

  Whereas, a capital cost funding commitment by the Federal government on May 11, 2021 means the project is now fully funded by all three levels of government, and

  Whereas, the Environmental Assessment for a Yonge Street alignment for the 8-kilometre route from the Toronto Transit Commission’s Finch Subway Station to the end-of-the-line in the Langstaff Gateway/Richmond Hill Centre included extensive public consultation and was approved by the Province of Ontario in 2009, and

  Whereas, Markham Council has endorsed York Region Rapid Transit Corporation’s Environmental Assessment that recommends a Yonge Street subway alignment, and

  Whereas, of the three potential alignments explored by Metrolinx as outlined in their Initial Business Case confirms that Options 1 and 2, each with a Yonge Street alignment, provide greater benefits in terms of individual Vehicle Kilometres Travelled and the number of people who will use transit during morning rush hour in 2041 than Option 3, and

  Whereas, there is statistically no difference among the three Options in terms of Benefit Cost Ratio and total Capital Costs as outlined in Metrolinx’s Initial Business Case and Supplementary Analysis which states Option 3 has “a more complex deliverability case”, and

  Whereas, Markham Council endorsed a Yonge Street alignment for the subway at its May 28, 2019 meeting indicating “optimizing the Yonge Subway Extension alignment in its own established transportation corridor which is Yonge Street;”

  Now Therefore Be It Resolved:

  1. That, Markham Council reject Metrolinx’s proposed Option 3 alignment for the Yonge North Subway Extension, and
  2. That Markham Council requests Metrolinx to pursue the Options 1 or 2 alignment for the Yonge North Subway Extension that adheres to Yonge Street, a major arterial road appropriate for intensification and economic development, and
  3. That any other alternative alignment for Options 1 and 2 considered by Metrolinx be kept on the Yonge Street corridor as much as possible to minimize any impacts to the existing community, and
  4. That once a final recommendation has been determined that all measures be considered including full compensation to any property owner impacted by any proposed alignment, and
  5. That Markham Council requests the Province of Ontario include subway stations for Thornhill at Clark Avenue and Royal Orchard Blvd. in the Yonge North Subway Extension capital project, and
  6. That a copy of this resolution be sent to:

  • Hon. Doug Ford, Premier of Ontario
  • Hon. Caroline Mulroney, Minister of Transportation
  • Hon. Kinga Surma, Associate Minister of Transportation
  • Hon. Laurie Scott, Minister of Infrastructure
  • Hon. Jeff Yurek, Minister of the Environment, Conservation & Parks
  • Hon. Steve Clark, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
  • Hon. Victor Fedeli, Minister of Economic Development, Job Creation and Trade
  • Hon. Catherine Mckenna, Minister of Infrastructure and Communities
  • Phil Verster, President and CEO, Metrolinx
  • John MacKenize, CEO, Toronto, and Region Conservation Authority
  • Wayne Emmerson, Chairman and CEO, York Region
  • Chris Raynor, Regional Clerk, Regional Municipality of York
  • Stephen Huycke, City Clerk, City of Richmond Hill
  • Council of the City of Vaughan
  • Council of the City of Richmond Hill
  • All Members of Federal Parliament in the Regional Municipality of York
  • All Members of Provincial Parliament in the Regional Municipality of York; and,
  • All Members of Regional Council in the Regional Municipality of York.

  Postponed

10.

NOTICES OF MOTION

Regional Councillor Jim Jones reassumed the Chair at 1:23 PM.

There was no Notices of Motion.

11.

NEW/OTHER BUSINESS

There was no other business.

12.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

There were no announcement.

13.

ADJOURNMENT

The Development Services Committee adjourned at 1:26 PM.